Judge says: ALL UK people Must be on DNA Database

ALL UK people Must be on DNA Database

The whole population and every UK visitor should be added to the national DNA database, a senior judge has said. Lord Justice Sedley said the
current database, which holds DNA from crime suspects and scenes, was "indefensible" because it was unfair and inconsistent.

Why must we all be catalogued this way? I have yet to see any argument for these measures that shows any real benefit to humanity and security. Of
course, these days we are all viewed as suspects anyway and need to be monitored in case we say the wrong thing and become a danger to the political
leadership and their corporate and banking backers.
At a time when more and more intrusive measures are devised, our leadership enjoy more and more secrecy and unaccountability. Who serves who here?

I dont even need to see what you saw to completely agree with you on this one. It seems the UK is the testing ground for much of these ideas. I mean
the whole surveillance thing is off the chart over there and now more talk about DNA databases.

Of course this has also been discussed in Australia with police being granted the powers to take your DNA sample for ANY crime, even as petty as jay
walking! Predictably the public didnt see any prob with it, spouting the old "well i have got anything to hide" line and completely missing the
point in the process.

well, if they are going to implement it then i think ALL politicians, police, army and judges should be first in line to be fingerprinted and dna
tested. they should then have their results run through the criminal databases for matches against unsolved crimes (and probably solved crimes that
had dna evidence also just to be sure). after all, we should be able to trust those who would guard the integrity of they country shouldn't we?

I just dont know how I feel about this. If one commits a crime, I see it asfair that they should be DNA tested to find out if they have committed any
other crimes but feel that it should be time limited.

My one BIG fear for any DNA Database would be security. Its common knowledge that very little is secure anywhere, and thats what worries me.

He said the only option was to expand the database to cover the whole population and all those who visit the UK.

I already despised UK for his police state mesures, now it's sure, I won't go anywhere near the NWO HQ. No wonder why a lot of british are
leaving... And stutmason, I guess you will say that it's not a police state mesure right?

Originally posted by Chorlton
I think this judge has been set up by the Government to break the story and make it public so the Government can then continue the debate

...and is that a bad thing? Surely the open discussion of significant topics such as this is a hallmark of a free democracy and to be applauded,
after all we've been discussing the issue here for a long time.

What Lord Sedley has said is that the present situation where anyone arrested for a reportable offence will have a DNA sample taken, whether or not
they are charged of convicted, is unacceptable due to its inconsistency, which is an opinion I would agree with and so the question becomes should we
move towards 100% coverage of the population with all the benefits that would bring in terms of the ability to identify criminals or should we revert
to a situation where only those found guilty of offences have DNA samples retained at the risk of losing the ability to identify criminals who will go
free as a result.

His view, based on his experience of resolving a number of old very serious crimes including serial rape is that a full coverage database would be a
good thing provided that it was used only for the purposes of crime detection and prevention and provided that it could be administered in an secure
and appropriate manner.

You know I really do not grasp the reason for such resistance to this proposal if proper use and security can be guaranteed, (and yes, that is an
awfully big "if"). What is the difference between this and a photograph other than the fact that the DNA sample provides far more effective
identification? I have never been arrested or interviewed by the police but I know for sure that I have been photographed and videoed many times
because I am subversive enough to go to football matches. Should I actually be concerned if I have DNA samples taken as well or should I actually be
pleased that if anyone does try to use identification evidence they stand much less chance of picking me in error?

I don't think something like this is right, DNA is something scientists are still learning from, who knows what they could do with it in future!? Why
would I want my DNA on database, when I don't know what they could do with it in future, that is against our human rights if they force us to do
this.

I think this judge has been set up by the Government to break the story and make it public so the Government can then continue the debate

Totally agree. They ain't getting mine without a fight.

Originally posted by _Phoenix I don't think something like this is
right, DNA is something scientists are still learning from, who knows what they could do with it in future!? Why would I want my DNA on database, when
I don't know what they could do with it in future, that is against our human rights if they force us to do this.

Yes, exactly my feeling.
Why is this scary? Because humans have culled humans on various scales in the past. This will be the most thorough and selective method in the
future, should someone decide on another great cull.Could put new meaning into the quantum world's "action at a distance". There are already
influential men who'd like to decimate the planet's pupulation and they're applauded for their great speeches. This is a big deal and the idea
should be nipped in the bud before it catches on.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.